hi guys, Preface: I'm my no means a seasoned collector, and this watch is by no means a collector grade example. I'm sure any imperfections and inconsistencies will be caught by the members who ARE experts. There are many of them here on the forums and that's why this place is so great. I bought this watch on eBay for relatively cheap - quite a bit less than you'd find a nice one for. I think that, although it's not collector grade, the case is in decent shape, it looks and wears well and keeps time very accurately. The sparkle dial is awesome too! If it does have issues that I haven't noticed or highlighted, please do let me know. I've been fortunate with my collection and I wanted to share back to the community that helped me acquire so many lovely pieces. So here's a little write up on one of my first pickups, an Omega Seamaster 'sparkle dial' chronometer with cal. 751, aka ST168.023. Overview: * Ref# ST168.023 * 36 mm diameter * 40 mm lug to lug * 19 mm lug width * 751 Chronometer certified movement This model has two difference reference numbers stamped into the caseback; 168.023 and 166.032. Of the Seamasters with a 75x movement, this one is the 1-6-8 (Gents, self winding with center seconds, water resistant+chronometer+calendar) version. The 166.032 (Gents, self winding with center seconds, waterproof+calendar) with 750 or 752 are non-chronometer siblings. This is an important distinction as they both share the same caseback and you may see the reference numbers used interchangeably. More info on vintage Omega reference numbers can be found on the Old Omegas site and elsewhere on the Internet. Case comes in stainless steel (ST), gold capped steel (CD), gold (BA) and white gold (BC) . The gold and white gold ones are very rare. OF member Mondodec (Desmond) has a definitive write up of them on his site which is mainly about Constellations. The one in this post is obviously the ST variety. Here's some shots of the case. these are unforgiving pictures. please forgive the crappy quality. Nice shape, great size. Nice straight lugs with a nice bevel. On a nice one, the bezel has a subtle sunburst finish. Not much sunburst left one this one, but the edges are still there and are fairly sharp despite some dings. The dial is one of the key features of this watch. It's a lovely dial. The finish is also found on the Constellations from the same era. Zoom in to see some of the sparkle. Pictures can't do this dial justice, especially as it sparkles in the sunlight. Go google some other pics. This dial is not easy to fake. This was another property of the watch that drew me to this one as the number of fakes and redials among the Constellation line is mind boggling. Note that on this one, the lume is pretty much completely gone even though the dial is clearly marked 'T Swiss Made T'. I'm ok with that. One thing I'm not sure of is whether these came in a 'gold' (also called Champagne) and 'silver' sparkle or if it's the same dial that just looks warm or cool depending on the ambiance. Another thing that's interesting is that, while these share the same text on the dials as the constellations (Automatic, Chronometer, Officially Certified), the text appears to be aligned differently. As a result, the MOY test doesn't apply to these Seamaster dials - at least, I couldn't find a Seamaster Sparkle dial that passed the MOY test anyway. The text on these however is all identically aligned on the examples that I could find online. The hands are pretty basic. Nothing too sexy but easy to read. These are new service replacements as the ones that came on the watch had been repainted somewhat poorly. The movement is cal 751 which is 24 jewel, automatic with day and date (quickset) and centre second. This is what makes this one interesting as 751 was usually used in Constellations. There are some 752-based Seamasters too. They are also 24 jewel and likely as accurate as the 751, though never earned the badge. They are otherwise identical in design but don't have 'chronometer officially certified' on the dial and are therefore somewhat less interesting (though just as beautiful). I believe that the 75x movements were omega's first with day and date. This one is serial 31m which puts it around '69, '70. It has been fully overhauled by an Omega certified shop here in Toronto who only did the movement, crystal and installed the new hands at my request. The movement looks spankin' new now. Bracelet came in steel or gold 1098 with 560 endlinks - at least I believe the bracelet number is the same for the different materials, but I haven't been able to determine that definitively. Leather is also an option. The 1098 in steel shows up on ebay now and then, though usually quite weathered. Gold? Good luck. This watch originally came in a red, basic box, nothing all that exciting. These little beauties do come up for sale now and again on the forums and on eBay and are quite reasonably priced - usually around $1000 USD +/- a bit for a nice one - nicer than mine,. They seem to come up without the original bracelet more commonly, in fact, I've never seen one for sale with the bracelet. The back story: In Oct last year, I began my forray into vintage Omega. I was attracted to this watch for a few reasons.. it's beautiful, it's vintage, it's somewhat rare being produced in low thousands only, and it's hard to fake or redial making it a fairly safe bet for a newb. I bought it on ebay from a seller with a spotted history and it was not in great shape but it was pretty cheap. I took a gamble. Here's the seller's pics - which are all i had to go on at that time. So, there we have it. My ST168.023. Thanks for reading! If you have one, please post pics! J
write up is nice and quite some work... but please do not feel offended - the pictures are awful... If you "invest" so much work into a write up you should at least include images which are not that blurry
This model is on my accumulate list. Here is a pair - one in 18k YG (with the bacelet and box and papers) and one in stainless steel (never worn)"
That is a nice watch, I can t get too excited about dress watches, but yours is quiet interesting, I bet it looks better in real life. Why does it have two reference numbers stamped in the case? Do all of examples of this model have two ref numbers or just yours?
Has the picture been photoshoped, the crown looks different on your watch compared with the OPs and the gold one, or did it come with a different crown?
My photos altered? If the crown is different in my pair compared to the OP's which do you think is the original one?
I am going to take a chance on the OP one becuase the gold version and the crown in the OPs photo look like they are the same with a cone shape while the crown with the silver one in your photo looks like it is completely flat
My money is with MSNWatch all day long And if you look properly the silver next to the gold is not flat at all
When I look at the picture that MSN Watch posted, the gold version and the OPs picture I can see some of the omega embelem on the crown. In the silver version it does not seem to be visable and looks flat. i might be the only person in the world to see this and had better pop off to the options, it could be that my ipad is playing up or I might need a kip
They all look the same to me. The rounded end of the silver crown just blends in with the background to create that illusion for you. Just look more closely.
Excellent write-up, J. I think it's cool that you've obviously put in some work and research here that benefits all the rest of us... Also, something to keep one occupied as they recover from an amazing haul of some nice booty! Meant to ask/do you know: Was this dial ever seen without the day/date? I really love clean dials.. don't like setting them... Edit: I think I found the answer in your text; some of the Connies had them...surely there's a no date version among them somewhere...
Here's a gold version (albeit, heavily polished ) in the same reference on the bay right now: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Omega-Seama...108?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ae7123944Purchases made through these links may earn this site a commission from the eBay Partner Network
I don't know if we can help the OP to achieve this. You can get some very sharp photos even with a phone if you get it in an area where the light is strong and you rest the phone against a surface so that it doesn't shake. Usually, I use a tripod and camera for photos of watches and movements but this one was taken earlier with my phone at a friends house. This is a 1920s ladies fob watch of about 25 mm diameter that hasn't worked for a long time (once people know you have an interest, it seems everyone you meet has a store of such things!) and without a loupe, the quickest way to view it in better detail was to take a quick photo. I wasn't interested in good light or framing, just something fairly sharp: It's clearly been 'got at' as any Watchmaker or tinkerer will see an obvious fault (apart from the apparently missing balance spring). Anyway, if you need help on achieving better photos, I am sure there are many happy to help. Cheers, Chris
Thanks for the feedback guys. The quality of the photos certainly leaves a lot to be desired. Mostly, it's bad light but also, shaky phone cam. I'm experimenting a bit with a proper camera and light difuser. Practice makes perfect.. consider this a practice run.